Branding Practices on Four Dairies in Kantale, Sri Lanka

Limited Effects of Pain Control Treatments on Behaviour and Weight Gain of Pure and Crossbred Nellore Heifer Calves When Subjected to Hot-Iron Branding

Hot-iron branding is still commonly performed in cattle farming in tropical countries, and possibly has negative consequences for animal welfare and weight gain. This study examined the behavioural and weight gain responses of pure and crossbred Nellore heifer calves subjected to hot-iron branding on the cheek, without and with use of anaesthesia and analgesia. Ninety-two heifer calves, around 120 days old, were studied prospectively when subjected to hot-iron branding on the cheek (a statutory procedure in Brazil following brucellosis vaccination). Four randomly selected groups of calves were allocated to four treatments: no pain control (CO); subcutaneous anaesthetic local block (LA); intramuscular analgesia (meloxicam) (LT); and local anaesthesia plus meloxicam (LL). Behaviour, flight speed and body weight were evaluated before, during, and five (5-d) and 60 days (60-d) after branding. For these parameters, the only difference observed was higher tension in the CO group 5-d post-branding, suggesting a short-term negative effect of branding without pain control. The limited effects of the pain control treatments suggest interference in pain assessment by other factors, such as expression of fear and stress. Despite the lack of differences observed in behaviour and production parameters, facial hot-iron branding is an obvious welfare issue and, due to the additional handling involved, adoption of a simple pain relief protocol is not sufficient to minimise the welfare impact.

The effect of breed, sex and oral meloxicam administration on pain biomarkers following hot-iron branding in Hereford and Angus calves

Hot-iron branding uses thermal injury to permanently identify cattle causing painful tissue damage. The primary objective was to examine the physiological and behavioral effects of oral meloxicam (MEL), compared to a control, administered at the time of hot-iron branding in Angus and Hereford steers and heifers. The secondary objectives were to investigate breed and sex effects on pain biomarkers. A total of 70 yearlings, consisting of 35 heifers and 35 steers (Angus, Hereford, or Angus × Hereford), were enrolled in the study. Animals were blocked by sex, randomized across weight, and assigned to receive MEL (1 mg/kg) or a placebo (CON). Biomarkers were assessed for 48 h after branding and included infrared thermography (IRT), mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT), accelerometry and a visual analog scale (VAS), and serum cortisol and prostaglandin E₂ metabolites (PGEM). Wound healing was assessed for 12 wk. Hair samples to quantify cortisol levels were taken prior to and 30 d post-branding. Responses were analyzed using repeated measures with calf nested in treatment as a random effect, and treatment, time, treatment by time interaction, breed, and sex as fixed effects. There was a treatment by time interaction for PGEM (P < 0.01) with MEL having lower values than CON at 6, 24, and 48 h (MEL: 18.34 ± 3.52, 19.61 ± 3.48, and 22.24 ± 3.48 pg/mL, respectively; CON: 32.57 ± 3.58, 37.00 ± 3.52, and 33.07 ± 3.48 pg/mL; P < 0.01). MEL showed less of a difference in maximum IRT values between the branded (2.27 ± 0.29 °C) and control site (3.15 ± 0.29 °C; P < 0.01). MEL took fewer lying bouts at 0–12 h (4.91 bouts ± 0.56) compared with CON (6.87 bouts ± 0.55; P < 0.01). Compared with Hereford calves, Angus calves exhibited greater serum but lower hair cortisol, greater PGEM, more lying bouts, and less healed wound scores at 3, 4, and 5 wk. Compared with heifers, steers exhibited lower PGEM, lower branding site and ocular IRT, higher MNT, and lower plasma meloxicam levels. Steers spent more time lying, took more lying bouts and had greater VAS pain, and more healed wound scores at 5 wk than heifers. Meloxicam administration at branding reduced branding and control site temperature differences and reduced lying bouts for the first 12 h. Breed and sex effects were observed across many biomarkers. Changes from baseline values for IRT, MNT, lying time, step count, VAS pain, and wound scoring all support that branding cattle is painful.

Hot-iron branding uses thermal injury to permanently identify cattle causing painful tissue damage. The primary objective was to examine the effects of oral meloxicam (MEL), compared with a control, administered at the time of hot-iron branding in Angus and Hereford steers and heifers. The secondary objectives were to investigate breed and sex effects on pain biomarkers. A total of 70 yearlings, consisting of 35 heifers and 35 steers (Angus, Hereford, or Angus × Hereford), were enrolled. Animals were assigned to receive MEL or a placebo. Changes from baseline values for infrared thermography (IRT), mechanical nociceptive threshold, lying time, step count, visual analog scale score, and wound scoring all support that hot-iron branding cattle is painful and investigation into analgesic strategies is needed. MEL administration reduced IRT differences from the branding and control site and reduced lying bouts. Breed and sex effects were observed across a wide range of biomarkers and should be considered in future pain studies. The practicality of administering a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug once at the time of branding is attractive. However, a multimodal approach using a combination of analgesics or longer acting analgesic option warrants further investigation to alleviate pain and discomfort caused by hot-iron branding.

Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia. Part 2: Categorisation and Scoring of Welfare Assessment Measures

This paper aims to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol by validating potential categorisation thresholds for assessing beef farms in various beef cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Forty measures, combined from a New Zealand-based protocol plus Namibia-specific measures, are applied to 55 beef farms (17 commercial farms, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal village farms) during pregnancy testing, and a questionnaire guided interview. The categorised measures on a 3-point welfare score (0: good, 1: marginal, and 2: poor/unacceptable welfare) are subsequently compared with the derivation of thresholds based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of herds for each measure. The overall combined thresholds of continuous measures across the three farm types show 10/22 measures that posed welfare compromise across Namibia, whereas commercial farms have 4/22 measures, and semi-commercial and communal village farms have 12/22 and 11/22, respectively, with high thresholds. Most measures-imposed thresholds are retained because of significant importance to the welfare of animals and preventiveness of the traits, while leniency was given to adjust good feeding and mortality measures to signify periods of drought. Handling measures (fearful, falling/lying) and abrasions thresholds are adjusted to reflect the temporary stress caused by infrequent cattle handling, and faulty yard designs/design and possible cattle breed influence on handling. Hence, Namibia needs prioritised investigation of underlying contributing factors and remediation to reduce the high thresholds.